Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Black Adam (DC Extended Universe)

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was:  keep. ✗ plicit  09:36, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Black Adam (DC Extended Universe)

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

Johnson's version of Black Adam won't be featured again from what it looks like, so this iteration of the character won't meet WP:NFILMCHAR WuTang94 (talk) 06:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep: To maintain precedent, see WP:NDRAFT and a plentiful of other attempts to prematurely delete these types of drafts. Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity, and as such, it is best to let the WP:G13 process run its course. We should not make an exception here because further appearances are not imminently expected. Trailblazer101 (talk) 06:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - Drafts have a calendar expiration date, and there is no need to try to delete them ahead of that time unless there is misconduct. It should be noted that the nominator has restarted the calendar by making this nomination.  If you don't like a draft, ignore it for six months.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:18, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Noting that the nominator is also the creator and primary contributor to this draft. I don't think it would qualify for WP:G7 outright as there have been contributions by other editors, but these contributions are pretty minor (adding a hatnote, changing a link, etc), so I think it's probably fine to consider it a pseudo-self-request. Curbon7 (talk) 22:22, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. This truly is the author requesting deletion in good faith when the only substantial content of the page was added by them, and not a pseudo-self request, but there are edits to the draft's actual content by others, and not just edits of a technical, ancillary, nature (so not just AfC templates, draftcat, cosmetic edits, removing the h1 heading, removing inappropriate external links, deleted files etc.; instead there were genuine copyedits and changes to the infobox), and there is no objective measure by which we can say that content edits start becoming "substantial content" edits, so this can never be the "most obvious" case, meaning an administrator should not delete, and "administrator should not delete" is practically identical to "does not apply", and if G7 does not apply, as there is an absence of any other other reason to delete, the final conclusion should be that we should not delete this page in the absence of a reason to delete.—Alalch E. 19:30, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Drafts are not checked for notability or sanity. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:42, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.